• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Next Gen Switch supposedly use 5nm Nvidia Tegra (Samsung Foundry)

THE DUCK

voted poster of the decade by bots
Give me 4tf and modern architecture and I'd be happy as a clam. But seems more likely to less than that.....
 
Last edited:

Comandr

Member
I love all of these tech speculation threads. It’s fun to think about future tech and how a given company will undoubtedly fail to meet individual peoples hopes and desires.

I just want the fuckin thing to be announced so everyone will shut up about it and I can watch the world burn when we see what it can (and can’t) do.
harvey-dent-die-a-hero.gif
 

THE DUCK

voted poster of the decade by bots
4TF when Steam Deck is pushing 25W just to deliver 1.6TF....

I'd temper my expectations guys. Nintendo will opt for a smaller design and smaller development costs. So if Deck has a SoC power budget of 15W, expect half of that for Switch 2.

I can live with 2tf in portable mode if they actually do something for play on the TV that enhances the output. I'm totally fine paying an extra $200-300 for a dock if it means actually boosting the performance beyond 1080p.
 

Jessmo23

Banned
How about we explain it in terms of fried Chicken sandwiches.
I guess the current switch would be Wendy's spicy Chicken
The switch 2 would be Rally/checkers mother cruncher.
Series s is Wendy's Asiago
Series X is Popeyes
And ps5 is chik fil a.
I changed my Mind, I went to Shaqs bug chicken today.
Ps5 pro would be Shaqs big chicken.
 

Reallink

Member
4TF when Steam Deck is pushing 25W just to deliver 1.6TF....

I'd temper my expectations guys. Nintendo will opt for a smaller design and smaller development costs. So if Deck has a SoC power budget of 15W, expect half of that for Switch 2.

To be fair Steamdeck will be nearing or exceeding 2 years old by the time this launches, but you're right, there's no way Nintendo hardware's going to exceed it. A realistic best case scenario would be performance on par with Steamdeck. Nintendo are misers and >90% of their audience doesn't give a flying fuck about graphics horsepower, they're going to build the cheapest and weakest hardware they can get away with.
 
Last edited:

UnNamed

Banned
I think the rumor is false because I still think the Switch 2's next chip may already be shipping in the new Jetson Orin Nano embedded PC, which coincidentally went on sale today and got its first preview at TomsHardware:

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidias-new-orin-nano-developer-kit-like-a-raspberry-pi-for-ai


It's designed to replace the previous Jetson Nano devkit which uses the same Tegra X1 that went into the Switch.

Jetson Nano -> Switch
Jetson Orin Nano -> Switch 2



Nvidia Orin Nano Developer Kit



Jetson Orin NanoJetson Nano
CPU6-core Arm Cortex-A78AE v8.2 64-bit CPUQuad-core ARM Cortex-A57 MPCore processor
1.5MB L2 + 4MB L3
GPUNvidia Ampere architecture with 1024 Nvidia CUDA cores andNvidia Maxwell architecture with 128 Nvidia CUDA cores
32 Tensor cores
Memory8GB 128-bit LPDDR54 GB 64-bit LPDDR4, 1600MHz 25.6 GB/s
68 GB/s
StorageMicro SD16 GB eMMC 5.1
NVMe M.2 via Carrier BoardMicro SD
Power7W to 15W (9-19V)20W (Max 5V at 4 Amps)
Dimensions69 x 45 x 21 mm69.6 x 45 x 20 mm


Jetson Orin NanoJetson Nano
Camera2x MIPI CSI-2 22-pin Camera Connectors12 lanes (3x4 or 4x2) MIPI CSI-2 D-PHY 1.1
M.2 Key Mx4 PCIe Gen 3
x2 PCIe Gen3
M.2 Key EPCIe (x1), USB 2.0, UART, I2S, and I2C1 x
USB4 x USB 3.2 Gen24x USB 3.0
1 x Type C for debug and device mode1 x USB 2.0 Micro-B
NetworkingGigabit EthernetGigabit Ethernet
RTL8822CE 802.11ac PCIe Wireless Network Adapter
DisplayDisplayPort 1.2HDMI 2.0 and eDP 1.4


Even if the GPU only works at 625MHz, it should still be an enormous upgrade over the Switch, and it might be close to the Steam Deck in performance.

Jetson Nano is more credible than that TX2 nonsense, but it's not impossible to see Nvidia take another route for the CPU.
Orin is optimized for AI and self drive, this means part of that architecture could be useless for a gaming device, so wasted silicon.
At the same time, Nvidia can use commercial Samsung chips like they did with Tegra X1.
 

GymWolf

Member
This is the thing I care the least about when it comes to Switch 2. They need to come up with some innovation. It won't happen otherwise
What better innovation than not be forced to play at 30 fps (or unstable 60) at 1998 era resolutions?

They already have the hybrid console gimmick going on, they don't need another gimmick on top of that, they need some fucking power.
 

ToTTenTranz

Banned
Jetson Nano is more credible than that TX2 nonsense, but it's not impossible to see Nvidia take another route for the CPU.
Orin is optimized for AI and self drive, this means part of that architecture could be useless for a gaming device, so wasted silicon.
At the same time, Nvidia can use commercial Samsung chips like they did with Tegra X1.
This is not the same Orin from 2021. It's a different, probably much smaller chip.


https://www.neogaf.com/threads/next...samsung-foundry.1654441/page-2#post-267745045
 
Switch is using something like 7-10W while gaming in handheld mode. Steam Deck can use upwards of 28W. Even if Switch 2 is using a more advanced chip, I wouldn't expect them to be running it in a 25W profile. ~10W total system power consumption is more likely. I'd expect it to perform like a Steam Deck with DLSS being prioritized as opposed to FSR1/2.

You have to keep in mind that Arm cores are much more energy efficient that those Zen 2 cores that are in the steamdeck.
 
Last edited:

supernova8

Banned
The best upgrade would be a dock with an eGPU. And they could even make it a clamshell and have games be dual screen even on TVs then without faffing about with transmitting all the data wirelessly.

They aren't going to do that though.

Yeah I'd happily buy an eGPU dock for maximum $200 if it was GTX 1660 ish performance, which is of course still a major leap above what power the Switch currently offers. For $200 I cannot imagine getting anything better (especially with Nvidia involved). I just want to be able to play BOTW on my Switch (on my TV) at 1080p60 without having to use an emulator. Should be doable.

Also goes without saying that whatever they release, it's not giving us 4K visuals unless we're talking basic 2D games (like Octopussy Travel Agents or whatever that game is called).
 
Last edited:

Jessmo23

Banned
Yeah I'd happily buy an eGPU dock for maximum $200 if it was GTX 1660 ish performance, which is of course still a major leap above what power the Switch currently offers. For $200 I cannot imagine getting anything better (especially with Nvidia involved). I just want to be able to play BOTW on my Switch (on my TV) at 1080p60 without having to use an emulator. Should be doable.

Also goes without saying that whatever they release, it's not giving us 4K visuals unless we're talking basic 2D games (like Octopussy Travel Agents or whatever that game is called).
its going to use DLSS
https://www.tomshardware.com/reference/what-is-nvidia-dlss

Also Like I said before, important 3rd parties influenced the design of the switch.
"Apparently, Nintendo reached out to various developers when it was creating the Nintendo Switch in order to get feedback on the console. It was during this process that Capcom and other developers pushed Nintendo to increase the Switch's RAM to at least 4GB, which is what the console launched with earlier this month.

The reason why Capcom wanted Nintendo to increase the Switch's RAM is simple. Capcom was in the midst of producing its RE Engine at the time, which powers Resident Evil 7, and it wanted Nintendo to create a console with enough memory to support the engine. It seems as though Nintendo took Capcom's advice, and while we have yet to see an announcement that Resident Evil 7 is coming to the Switch, we now know that it is at least a possibility.

Even though the Switch is technically powerful enough to support the RE Engine, Capcom has yet to actually port it to the device. Capcom has been struggling to make the engine work with both the Switch's portable and docked states, which could explain why we have yet to see any major Capcom games announced for the new console outside of Ultra Street Fighter 2: The Final Challengers.
https://gamerant.com/nintendo-switch-capcom-ram/#:~:text=The reason why Capcom wanted,memory to support the engine."

If Capcom wants the switch 2 to be able to run RE4 engine in 4k then Nintendo will make it happen. I cannot stress how important Monster hunter and a few other 3rd parties are to Nintendo's japan market.
Monster hunter rise uses the RE engine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RE_Engine#:~:text=RE Engine, also known as,Rise and Street Fighter 6.
 
Last edited:

StereoVsn

Member
Jetson Nano is more credible than that TX2 nonsense, but it's not impossible to see Nvidia take another route for the CPU.
Orin is optimized for AI and self drive, this means part of that architecture could be useless for a gaming device, so wasted silicon.
At the same time, Nvidia can use commercial Samsung chips like they did with Tegra X1.
Couldn't they use AI silicon for DLSS and other AI enhancing purposes?
 

OuterLimits

Member
If that's true that means Switch 2 will probably take longer to release, which would give credence to Nintendo's recent comment that Switch still has "a few years left" https://wccftech.com/nintendo-of-america-president-believes-the-switch-has-a-few-years-left/

Thor is set to be released in 2025.

On the upside that means Switch 2 will be more powerful than expected. It would use the Ada Lovelace architecture (RTX40xx) instead of Ampere and ARM v9 cores instead of ARM v8.

Do we know the track record of this leaker?

Perhaps, but I don't have much concern for the "few years left" comment. They will say stuff like that until 5 minutes before the successor is actually announced since they want the Switch to sell. Plus, I imagine the Switch will still get some support after the Switch 2 launches.(prob far less than PS4 still got after PS5 launched though)
 
Switch is using something like 7-10W while gaming in handheld mode. Steam Deck can use upwards of 28W. Even if Switch 2 is using a more advanced chip, I wouldn't expect them to be running it in a 25W profile. ~10W total system power consumption is more likely. I'd expect it to perform like a Steam Deck with DLSS being prioritized as opposed to FSR1/2.
Switch 2/ whatever next-gen system Nintendo makes, will not compete on the level of Steam Deck. I think most people know that, based on how Nintendo approaches hardware design and where they like to price their hardware at, but maybe people think because it's a next-gen handheld it will be like a Nintendo Steam Deck. But it just won't be that. Compared to Nintendo Switch, which is 2015 mobile architecture, it will surely be a generational leap compared to their own hardware up to this point. But comparing it to Steam Deck I think will be at best an apples & oranges comparison.

I think there’s a ceiling for Nintendo hardware and it’s $399, so if they’re trying to put in faster storage, such as a mini SSD, that’s going to come at the expense of an OLED screen being in the new system, or at the expense of a huge leap in performance. Maybe it’s only x3 more powerful than Switch instead of x5 more powerful. Take your pick. But it’s all about priorities and what features need to be in the new system to justify a next-gen platform, vs trying to make a high-end enthusiast/performant device like Steam Deck.

There will always be competitors with more powerful devices on the market, and that will never change, but rarely is the most powerful device the most popular. Nintendo’s proven that over and over again across handheld and console.
 
Last edited:

tkscz

Member

I said this in my previous post as back in January Nvidia canceled the Ampere+ line and was only going with Lovelace, most likely due to Samsung's terrible chip yields.

Nvidia still has a contract with Nintendo until 2027 so most likely they'll just use Thor (Lovelace based Tegra), but this does mean the Switch will be going for a bit longer than it should. Sales numbers are already dropping and Nvidia themselves said they are not longer producing X1 boards.

I think the rumor is false because I still think the Switch 2's next chip may already be shipping in the new Jetson Orin Nano embedded PC, which coincidentally went on sale today and got its first preview at TomsHardware:

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidias-new-orin-nano-developer-kit-like-a-raspberry-pi-for-ai


It's designed to replace the previous Jetson Nano devkit which uses the same Tegra X1 that went into the Switch.

Jetson Nano -> Switch
Jetson Orin Nano -> Switch 2



Nvidia Orin Nano Developer Kit



Jetson Orin NanoJetson Nano
CPU6-core Arm Cortex-A78AE v8.2 64-bit CPUQuad-core ARM Cortex-A57 MPCore processor
1.5MB L2 + 4MB L3
GPUNvidia Ampere architecture with 1024 Nvidia CUDA cores andNvidia Maxwell architecture with 128 Nvidia CUDA cores
32 Tensor cores
Memory8GB 128-bit LPDDR54 GB 64-bit LPDDR4, 1600MHz 25.6 GB/s
68 GB/s
StorageMicro SD16 GB eMMC 5.1
NVMe M.2 via Carrier BoardMicro SD
Power7W to 15W (9-19V)20W (Max 5V at 4 Amps)
Dimensions69 x 45 x 21 mm69.6 x 45 x 20 mm


Jetson Orin NanoJetson Nano
Camera2x MIPI CSI-2 22-pin Camera Connectors12 lanes (3x4 or 4x2) MIPI CSI-2 D-PHY 1.1
M.2 Key Mx4 PCIe Gen 3
x2 PCIe Gen3
M.2 Key EPCIe (x1), USB 2.0, UART, I2S, and I2C1 x
USB4 x USB 3.2 Gen24x USB 3.0
1 x Type C for debug and device mode1 x USB 2.0 Micro-B
NetworkingGigabit EthernetGigabit Ethernet
RTL8822CE 802.11ac PCIe Wireless Network Adapter
DisplayDisplayPort 1.2HDMI 2.0 and eDP 1.4


Even if the GPU only works at 625MHz, it should still be an enormous upgrade over the Switch, and it might be close to the Steam Deck in performance.

The issue with that is the Switch doesn't use the Jetson Nano, it uses the full X1 AGX board. Not only that but the Orin has two AGX models, of which the cancelled Switch Pro was using the weaker of the two.
 
Last edited:

Mr.Phoenix

Member
its going to use DLSS
https://www.tomshardware.com/reference/what-is-nvidia-dlss

Also Like I said before, important 3rd parties influenced the design of the switch.
"Apparently, Nintendo reached out to various developers when it was creating the Nintendo Switch in order to get feedback on the console. It was during this process that Capcom and other developers pushed Nintendo to increase the Switch's RAM to at least 4GB, which is what the console launched with earlier this month.

The reason why Capcom wanted Nintendo to increase the Switch's RAM is simple. Capcom was in the midst of producing its RE Engine at the time, which powers Resident Evil 7, and it wanted Nintendo to create a console with enough memory to support the engine. It seems as though Nintendo took Capcom's advice, and while we have yet to see an announcement that Resident Evil 7 is coming to the Switch, we now know that it is at least a possibility.

Even though the Switch is technically powerful enough to support the RE Engine, Capcom has yet to actually port it to the device. Capcom has been struggling to make the engine work with both the Switch's portable and docked states, which could explain why we have yet to see any major Capcom games announced for the new console outside of Ultra Street Fighter 2: The Final Challengers.
https://gamerant.com/nintendo-switch-capcom-ram/#:~:text=The reason why Capcom wanted,memory to support the engine."

If Capcom wants the switch 2 to be able to run RE4 engine in 4k then Nintendo will make it happen. I cannot stress how important Monster hunter and a few other 3rd parties are to Nintendo's japan market.
Monster hunter rise uses the RE engine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RE_Engine#:~:text=RE Engine, also known as,Rise and Street Fighter 6.
:messenger_astonished:
 

Mr.Phoenix

Member
You have to keep in mind that Arm cores are much more energy efficient that those Zen 2 cores that are in the steamdeck.
While not specifically directed to you, I see there is a lot of posters here with very questionable knowledge of the tech underpinning these systems.

So I am not being a competitive ass, I will address what you have said here.

Yes, ARM cores use less power. But there is a reason for that. ARM is a RISC processor. X86 is a CISC processor. ARM cores will do one instruction per cycle. X86 can handle multiple and/or complex instructions per cycle. That is why ARM processors use less power. At the same clock speed, an X86 chip can handle code multiple orders of magnitude more complex an with far more ease than an ARM chip.
 

Jinzo Prime

Member
The best upgrade would be a dock with an eGPU. And they could even make it a clamshell and have games be dual screen even on TVs then without faffing about with transmitting all the data wirelessly.

They aren't going to do that though.
I strongly want a clamshell design for a new Switch Lite.
 

Zannegan

Member
Man, I was so excited when I clicked on this thread hoping for some new speculation, but that update killed it dead before I got here.

The best upgrade would be a dock with an eGPU. And they could even make it a clamshell and have games be dual screen even on TVs then without faffing about with transmitting all the data wirelessly.

They aren't going to do that though.
I like the idea of powerful hardware in a "dock," but I feel like it needs to go a half-step further than just an eGPU.

Peripherals only ever sell a fraction of what the base console does. An eGPU that can't function on its own would be a very expensive peripheral, especially for those who don't yet have a Switch. Its audience would be limited to current Switch owners and those who are willing to shell out the equivalent of a PS5/XSX to buy both at the same time. I don't see it selling any better than those drop-in expansion modules for Sega systems back in the day.

But, if you were to make a modestly powerful Tegra console that ALSO functioned as a super-dock, you'd have a much better value proposition. New customers could just get the console, or both if they liked. Switch owners would get their upgrade plus some additional functionality, like the wireless two-screen gaming you mention (which I don't think you can do with just an eGPU), or even the reverse: beaming console gameplay to the first gen Switch, or two, or even more. You could even beam console gameplay to tablets and phones. Lots of interesting possibilities there.
 

Kataploom

Gold Member
At the moment 5nm is what's available. 3nm isn't there yet and besides Apple, I don't think anyone will get their hands on it before the end of the year. Switch using the most recent tech would surprise me given Nintendo's history.
But it was when it released, though, at least the best possible low power chip in the market... That year some other better chips started to get available but they were too expensive.

It will be funny if Nintendo can pull a Series S-like Switch and it starts becoming the lower common denominator.
 

UnNamed

Banned
Couldn't they use AI silicon for DLSS and other AI enhancing purposes?

I'm talking about instuctions in the CPU cores, not GPU. Latest Nvidia GPU had their tensor cores to implement DLSS.

And talkin about DLSS, I think there is a (small) chance to see DLSS implemented via cuda cores and not tensor cores. The problem with tensor cores is you need a lot of them, and the GPU with less tensor cores is the RTX2060, 1920 Cuda cores and 240 TC. I don't know if a Switch 2 will have all that cores and how many of them are needed to do a proper upscale. Nvida can use them or strip them to reduce the size of the chip and implement the DLSS with normal cores, like DLSS1. Who knows, just speculations.
 

disap.ed

Member
I am pretty sure the Jetson Orin Nano is using the same T239 chip, just in its salvage version. I guess the full chip will have the 8 CPU cores / 1536 GPU ALUs rumored before, curious if the Switch 2 will use the whole chip.
 

alucard0712_rus

Gold Member
IMO Nintendo will use something like that. Very cheap and fits their needs. No 4K and it's better for it.

Tegra X2​

Nvidia's Tegra X2 (codenamed "Parker") features Nvidia's own custom general-purpose ARMv8-compatible core Denver 2 as well as code-named Pascal graphics processing core with GPGPU support. The chips are made using FinFET process technology using TSMC's 16 nm FinFET+ manufacturing process.

  • CPU: Nvidia Denver2 ARMv8 (64-bit) dual-core + ARMv8 ARM Cortex-A57 quad-core (64-bit)
  • RAM: up to 8GB LPDDR4
  • GPU: Pascal-based, 256 CUDA cores; type: GP10B
  • TSMC 16 nm, FinFET process
  • TDP: 7.5–15 W
 

Imtjnotu

Member
IMO Nintendo will use something like that. Very cheap and fits their needs. No 4K and it's better for it.

Tegra X2​

Nvidia's Tegra X2 (codenamed "Parker") features Nvidia's own custom general-purpose ARMv8-compatible core Denver 2 as well as code-named Pascal graphics processing core with GPGPU support. The chips are made using FinFET process technology using TSMC's 16 nm FinFET+ manufacturing process.

  • CPU: Nvidia Denver2 ARMv8 (64-bit) dual-core + ARMv8 ARM Cortex-A57 quad-core (64-bit)
  • RAM: up to 8GB LPDDR4
  • GPU: Pascal-based, 256 CUDA cores; type: GP10B
  • TSMC 16 nm, FinFET process
  • TDP: 7.5–15 W
for this tho TSMC is not doing large bulk orders on 16nm. alot of their stuff is built around 7nm now and 4nm for the more high end SoC's.

i doubt we get any SoC larger than 7nm
 

UnNamed

Banned
IMO Nintendo will use something like that. Very cheap and fits their needs. No 4K and it's better for it.

Tegra X2​

Nvidia's Tegra X2 (codenamed "Parker") features Nvidia's own custom general-purpose ARMv8-compatible core Denver 2 as well as code-named Pascal graphics processing core with GPGPU support. The chips are made using FinFET process technology using TSMC's 16 nm FinFET+ manufacturing process.

  • CPU: Nvidia Denver2 ARMv8 (64-bit) dual-core + ARMv8 ARM Cortex-A57 quad-core (64-bit)
  • RAM: up to 8GB LPDDR4
  • GPU: Pascal-based, 256 CUDA cores; type: GP10B
  • TSMC 16 nm, FinFET process
  • TDP: 7.5–15 W
bugs-bunnys-no-meme-512x512.png
 

supernova8

Banned
its going to use DLSS
https://www.tomshardware.com/reference/what-is-nvidia-dlss

Also Like I said before, important 3rd parties influenced the design of the switch.
"Apparently, Nintendo reached out to various developers when it was creating the Nintendo Switch in order to get feedback on the console. It was during this process that Capcom and other developers pushed Nintendo to increase the Switch's RAM to at least 4GB, which is what the console launched with earlier this month.

The reason why Capcom wanted Nintendo to increase the Switch's RAM is simple. Capcom was in the midst of producing its RE Engine at the time, which powers Resident Evil 7, and it wanted Nintendo to create a console with enough memory to support the engine. It seems as though Nintendo took Capcom's advice, and while we have yet to see an announcement that Resident Evil 7 is coming to the Switch, we now know that it is at least a possibility.

Even though the Switch is technically powerful enough to support the RE Engine, Capcom has yet to actually port it to the device. Capcom has been struggling to make the engine work with both the Switch's portable and docked states, which could explain why we have yet to see any major Capcom games announced for the new console outside of Ultra Street Fighter 2: The Final Challengers.
https://gamerant.com/nintendo-switch-capcom-ram/#:~:text=The reason why Capcom wanted,memory to support the engine."

If Capcom wants the switch 2 to be able to run RE4 engine in 4k then Nintendo will make it happen. I cannot stress how important Monster hunter and a few other 3rd parties are to Nintendo's japan market.
Monster hunter rise uses the RE engine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RE_Engine#:~:text=RE Engine, also known as,Rise and Street Fighter 6.

Was with you until you said 4K. It's not happening lol. 1080p upscaled to 4K cool but not actual 4K.
 

Tams

Member
Man, I was so excited when I clicked on this thread hoping for some new speculation, but that update killed it dead before I got here.


I like the idea of powerful hardware in a "dock," but I feel like it needs to go a half-step further than just an eGPU.

Peripherals only ever sell a fraction of what the base console does. An eGPU that can't function on its own would be a very expensive peripheral, especially for those who don't yet have a Switch. Its audience would be limited to current Switch owners and those who are willing to shell out the equivalent of a PS5/XSX to buy both at the same time. I don't see it selling any better than those drop-in expansion modules for Sega systems back in the day.

But, if you were to make a modestly powerful Tegra console that ALSO functioned as a super-dock, you'd have a much better value proposition. New customers could just get the console, or both if they liked. Switch owners would get their upgrade plus some additional functionality, like the wireless two-screen gaming you mention (which I don't think you can do with just an eGPU), or even the reverse: beaming console gameplay to the first gen Switch, or two, or even more. You could even beam console gameplay to tablets and phones. Lots of interesting possibilities there.
We aren't going to get anything powerful from from Nintendo like that. It's simply too far above the price Nintendo like to sell their hardware at.

An eGPU dock is the only way I see that happening. Nintendo get to target their usual audience, but those who want more power get it too, for a price.
 

StereoVsn

Member
I'm talking about instuctions in the CPU cores, not GPU. Latest Nvidia GPU had their tensor cores to implement DLSS.

And talkin about DLSS, I think there is a (small) chance to see DLSS implemented via cuda cores and not tensor cores. The problem with tensor cores is you need a lot of them, and the GPU with less tensor cores is the RTX2060, 1920 Cuda cores and 240 TC. I don't know if a Switch 2 will have all that cores and how many of them are needed to do a proper upscale. Nvida can use them or strip them to reduce the size of the chip and implement the DLSS with normal cores, like DLSS1. Who knows, just speculations.
Good point on CPU vs GPU AI hardware, but hell, we do have AI specific hardware silicon in phones now days, whether Google's Tensor design with AI specific TPU module or Qualcomm's offering.

So got to think it should be possible for Nvidia to allocate specialized AI hardware in a modern SoC offering. That said, it's Nintendo so they will want something cheap so who knows.
 
I said this in my previous post as back in January Nvidia canceled the Ampere+ line and was only going with Lovelace, most likely due to Samsung's terrible chip yields.

Nvidia still has a contract with Nintendo until 2027 so most likely they'll just use Thor (Lovelace based Tegra), but this does mean the Switch will be going for a bit longer than it should. Sales numbers are already dropping and Nvidia themselves said they are not longer producing X1 boards.



The issue with that is the Switch doesn't use the Jetson Nano, it uses the full X1 AGX board. Not only that but the Orin has two AGX models, of which the cancelled Switch Pro was using the weaker of the two.

 

coffinbirth

Member
While not specifically directed to you, I see there is a lot of posters here with very questionable knowledge of the tech underpinning these systems.

So I am not being a competitive ass, I will address what you have said here.

Yes, ARM cores use less power. But there is a reason for that. ARM is a RISC processor. X86 is a CISC processor. ARM cores will do one instruction per cycle. X86 can handle multiple and/or complex instructions per cycle. That is why ARM processors use less power. At the same clock speed, an X86 chip can handle code multiple orders of magnitude more complex an with far more ease than an ARM chip.
This is a very outmoded mindset.

ARM isn't really RISC these days.

There are variable number ops all over the place, variable length instructions, instructions that read/write multiple registers, etc.
Clean addressing and optimal pipelines make ARM punch way above their perceived weight and has nothing to do with this unless Nvidia/Nintendo make an OoO platform, which they obviously won't.
 

Mr.Phoenix

Member
This is a very outmoded mindset.

ARM isn't really RISC these days.

There are variable number ops all over the place, variable length instructions, instructions that read/write multiple registers, etc.
Clean addressing and optimal pipelines make ARM punch way above their perceived weight and has nothing to do with this unless Nvidia/Nintendo make an OoO platform, which they obviously won't.
No. RISC is RISC and CISC is CISC. Can pipeline streaming and software optimization make ARM perform similarly to x86? Yes. Would it make it easy to do? No.

Simply put, its really easy to make something designed for ARM run on x86, doing it the other way around... isn't. This problem is exacerbated when you consider that where they are porting from is/are hardware that is orders of magnitude more performant to begin with.

Just look at what is out there. The steam deck is a 1.6TF (boost mode) handheld. Now, while don't even believe Nintendowi make hardware that powerful, but lets say they do. That's already a 8TF+ data in GPU power alone compared to the 4K twins. And this is just talking about the GPU.
 

Raploz

Member
Simply put, its really easy to make something designed for ARM run on x86, doing it the other way around... isn't.
No one is writing games in Assembly nowadays. Everything is abstracted. Your C++ game engine will run just fine on ARM as it does on x86-64. The compiler does the whole job.

ARM can be as fast as x86-64 nowadays, just look at Apple's offerings and how they're competing toe-to-toe with Intel and AMD in performance. Heck, even servers are using ARM nowadays and they get competitive performance against their x86 counterparts. This is not the 1990's anymore. ARM cores have come a long way.

Yes, ARM cores use less power. But there is a reason for that. ARM is a RISC processor. X86 is a CISC processor. ARM cores will do one instruction per cycle. X86 can handle multiple and/or complex instructions per cycle. That is why ARM processors use less power. At the same clock speed, an X86 chip can handle code multiple orders of magnitude more complex an with far more ease than an ARM chip.

A single instruction in CISC can take multiple clock cycles to complete because it's more complex, while in RISC an instruction only takes a single clock cycle because it only does a single thing. You need more instructions to do the same thing in RISC but you can execute them faster, use less transistors and have more space for general purpose registers. Since you need less transistors to feed, you need less power.

RISC cores can and do perform multiple operations per clock due to Pipelining, the same way as x86 (which nowadays translates their instructions internally to RISC to be able to do that).

Sources: https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/courses/soco/projects/risc/risccisc/

https://www.d.umn.edu/~gshute/arch/pipelining.xhtml

Just look at what is out there. The steam deck is a 1.6TF (boost mode) handheld. Now, while don't even believe Nintendowi make hardware that powerful, but lets say they do. That's already a 8TF+ data in GPU power alone compared to the 4K twins. And this is just talking about the GPU.
No one is expecting Switch 2 to run games at 4k and at the same settings as PS5 and Xbox Series consoles. As such, it's fine if it isn't as fast as the big consoles. The Steam Deck can play almost all games out there, just at 720p and lower settings.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom